Thread Reader helps you read and share Twitter threads easily!
I'm @ThreadReaderApp a Twitter bot here to help you read threads more easily. To trigger me, you just have to reply to (or quote) any tweet of the thread you want to unroll and mention me with the "unroll" keyword and I'll send you a link back on Twitter 😀
— Thread Reader App (@threadreaderapp) November 25, 2017
X thread is series of posts by the same author connected with a line!
From any post in the thread, mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll
Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us easily!
Practice here first or read more on our help page!
Recent
Hello @KeishaBottoms and @burtjonesforga — blacks are backing @TeamJacksonHQ for a reasons! We are tired of insiders! We want an outsider.
Go hear my new song @ajc @nytimes @breakfastclubam
Keisha Lance Bottoms mismanaged the incident at the Burnt Wendy’s
Burt Jones failed..
Go hear my new song @ajc @nytimes @breakfastclubam
Keisha Lance Bottoms mismanaged the incident at the Burnt Wendy’s
Burt Jones failed..
To act when he could have contracted Daniel Davenport Enterprises to solve the elections security problem.
He has a new system which actually earns money for the state contracting and using his machine. He advised Trump on DeFi and more.
You can see his work here:
👇
He has a new system which actually earns money for the state contracting and using his machine. He advised Trump on DeFi and more.
You can see his work here:
👇
sec.gov/about/crypto-t…
@RickJacksonGA you should reach out to Daniel Davenport Enterprises who advised Trump on DeFi. Start at the link. Maybe you could bring this to our state— I know blacks want this, and everyone benefits but I speak for blacks only
music.amazon.com/albums/B0H1R5C…
@RickJacksonGA you should reach out to Daniel Davenport Enterprises who advised Trump on DeFi. Start at the link. Maybe you could bring this to our state— I know blacks want this, and everyone benefits but I speak for blacks only
music.amazon.com/albums/B0H1R5C…
Why are more people suddenly talking about Fenbendazole for parasites? 👀
Originally known as a deworming medicine, Fenbendazole is now getting major attention in wellness & parasite discussions.
Here’s why👇
Originally known as a deworming medicine, Fenbendazole is now getting major attention in wellness & parasite discussions.
Here’s why👇
1/
Parasites may not always cause obvious symptoms.
Sometimes people report:
• Fatigue
• Bloating
• Sugar cravings
• Brain fog
• Skin issues
Many ignore these signs for years.
Parasites may not always cause obvious symptoms.
Sometimes people report:
• Fatigue
• Bloating
• Sugar cravings
• Brain fog
• Skin issues
Many ignore these signs for years.
2/
Fenbendazole belongs to a group called benzimidazoles.
Its main role?
Targeting parasites by disrupting how they produce energy.
Fenbendazole belongs to a group called benzimidazoles.
Its main role?
Targeting parasites by disrupting how they produce energy.
Supreme Court hears pleas on formulating nationwide safety norms and uniform admission guidelines for ICUs and critical care units across India.
Bench: Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan
Bench: Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan
The court had recently directed States and Union Territories to prepare time-bound action plans to implement guidelines on minimum standards for ICUs.
Read👇
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
Read👇
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
Court: the court has had detailed interaction with the parties. Today it considered what would be the immediate next step in the exercise undertaken in the present proceedings so as to take some real, effective steps on the ground.
whats not to love about space federation ip??
and/or space civilizations ip??
make ya own ip??
I promised our analysis of the £5m gift to Nigel Farage would annoy everybody.
The verdict? He probably doesn't owe any tax.
Why? Because "campaigning for Brexit" isn't a taxable trade, and genuine gifts aren't income.
But there are risks for him.
Thread:
The verdict? He probably doesn't owe any tax.
Why? Because "campaigning for Brexit" isn't a taxable trade, and genuine gifts aren't income.
But there are risks for him.
Thread:
All the details are in our report:
Reflects analysis from seven highly experienced tax advisers, and review by many more. Not just my views.
This thread is a v high level summary which necessarily simplifies and skips detail.taxpolicy.org.uk/2026/05/20/far…
Reflects analysis from seven highly experienced tax advisers, and review by many more. Not just my views.
This thread is a v high level summary which necessarily simplifies and skips detail.taxpolicy.org.uk/2026/05/20/far…
For anyone in a cave, the basic facts: Christopher Harborne, a British-Thai billionaire, gave Farage £5m in 2024.
Harborne has been based in Thailand for more than 20 years. He gave many £m to the Brexit Party and then Reform UK. And recently paid for £55k of Farage flights.
Harborne has been based in Thailand for more than 20 years. He gave many £m to the Brexit Party and then Reform UK. And recently paid for £55k of Farage flights.
al-Bukhari (30) and Muslim (1661) Clarified.
This hadith is talking regarding a believing servant.
This hadith is talking regarding a believing servant.
“And do not burden them with what they cannot bear. If you do burden them, then help them,” meaning, do not demand more work from them.
dorar.net/hadith/sharh/8…
dorar.net/hadith/sharh/8…
@threadreaderapp unroll
Germany is the epicentre of the China Shock 2.0 reverberating in global markets
In a new paper, @Brad_Setser and I show the shock is a key driver of Germany’s economic malaise. And it's accelerating
Berlin needs to stop admiring the problem, and join efforts to fight back
1/
In a new paper, @Brad_Setser and I show the shock is a key driver of Germany’s economic malaise. And it's accelerating
Berlin needs to stop admiring the problem, and join efforts to fight back
1/
China’s exploding exports are squeezing German firms in cars, machinery, chemicals and aerospace in China, third markets and increasingly Europe itself.
The drag from falling net exports has accelerated sharply since 2023, amounting to roughly 3% of German GDP.
2/
The drag from falling net exports has accelerated sharply since 2023, amounting to roughly 3% of German GDP.
2/
The damage has fed through to industrial production, with sectors most exposed to Chinese competition shrinking fastest.
Germany isn't alone. Every major EU economy except the Netherlands (buoyed by chipmaking giant ASML) has seen exports to China fall
Bureaucracy anyone?
3/
Germany isn't alone. Every major EU economy except the Netherlands (buoyed by chipmaking giant ASML) has seen exports to China fall
Bureaucracy anyone?
3/
Handelsblatt has -- on its front page -- an article summarizing my new paper with Sander Tordoir on Germany's need to find policies to actually fight back against the second China shock
handelsblatt.com/politik/deutsc…
1/ x.com/CER_EU/status/…
handelsblatt.com/politik/deutsc…
1/ x.com/CER_EU/status/…
China's industrial structure -- as the ECB and others have noted -- increasingly overlaps with that of Germany ... with autos being the most obvious case.
And the China shock there won't go away on its own; Chinese auto export growth accelerated in the last 12ms
2/
And the China shock there won't go away on its own; Chinese auto export growth accelerated in the last 12ms
2/
The China shock is also visible in the global data -- an undervalued Chinese currency propelled Chinese exports to grow much faster than global trade. China is now big, so that meant someone else's exports had to grow more slowly than global trade ...
3/
3/
There were two friends
They both each received $4000 in USDT on their CEx, the first friend thinks to himself 'Really nothing to do with it, so let me just leave it for now", so he does
The Second one also doesn't have much to do with the money, but .... 🧵🧵
They both each received $4000 in USDT on their CEx, the first friend thinks to himself 'Really nothing to do with it, so let me just leave it for now", so he does
The Second one also doesn't have much to do with the money, but .... 🧵🧵
he needs a passive income source and can't just let it stay dormant in his Exchange for months. Then he remembered an App he heard about some while ago on Twitter @coinexcom
CoinEx is a global crypto exchange, that offers services like buying, selling and trading of cryptocurrencies, securely.
But its most important feature is that you can stake popular coins like BTC, Eth, Sol, USDT, USDC and earn daily, without the headache of lockup periods.
But its most important feature is that you can stake popular coins like BTC, Eth, Sol, USDT, USDC and earn daily, without the headache of lockup periods.
Speaking of silly, can we agree that the WHO has Ebola experts?
Let's talk about PPE, and a bias towards "less PPE is better."
Let's talk about PPE, and a bias towards "less PPE is better."
The WHO EBOLA IPC guidance:
Foreshadow on PPE
"...due to the desirability of an off-
the-face design, and not for protection from aerosols, respirators may be used instead of medical masks"who.int/publications/i…
Foreshadow on PPE
"...due to the desirability of an off-
the-face design, and not for protection from aerosols, respirators may be used instead of medical masks"who.int/publications/i…
If you can stay 3 feet away while screening? No medical mask needed.
There are documents which, had we read them just a few years ago, we would never have believed were official state documents. Today, after 3.5 years in the company of Israel’s racist government, they somehow seem completely natural. One such document recently reached us. Thread.
1/ Yesterday (19.5.2026), an interesting hearing was scheduled before Judge Naama Keren Aharon at the Jerusalem Appeals Tribunal. has become internationally known. >>
2/ The appellant is an Italian journalist and photographer named Alessandro Stefanelli, who for years reported on events in Israel and particularly in the West Bank without any interference from Israeli authorities. >>
Let’s face it: there are a few things they don’t teach you at medical school.
One of them is what to do when the NHS decides you are the problem in a whistleblowing case.
I have spent the last twelve years learning this lesson and have had some interesting tutors.
I was a resident doctor in a South London Intensive Care Unit when I raised concerns about night-time staffing levels. The sort of concerns that make NHS executives stop smiling mid-sentence. The sort of concerns that later get described as “serious” once enough time has passed and enough lawyers have been paid.
Eventually, after six years, several courts, and a small forest’s worth of paper, those concerns were accepted as protected disclosures. They were linked to two avoidable deaths which, at the time, were quietly removed from formal investigations. That part is now officially undisputed.
What is disputed is what happened next.
1/6
One of them is what to do when the NHS decides you are the problem in a whistleblowing case.
I have spent the last twelve years learning this lesson and have had some interesting tutors.
I was a resident doctor in a South London Intensive Care Unit when I raised concerns about night-time staffing levels. The sort of concerns that make NHS executives stop smiling mid-sentence. The sort of concerns that later get described as “serious” once enough time has passed and enough lawyers have been paid.
Eventually, after six years, several courts, and a small forest’s worth of paper, those concerns were accepted as protected disclosures. They were linked to two avoidable deaths which, at the time, were quietly removed from formal investigations. That part is now officially undisputed.
What is disputed is what happened next.
1/6
The Helpful Fiction 2/6
In the UK, there is a comforting bedtime story we tell ourselves about judges.
It goes something like this: judges are neutral, wise, objective people who simply weigh evidence on a set of invisible scales. Sometimes they get it wrong, but only in the way a GP occasionally misdiagnoses hay fever as a cold.
Bias, we’re told, is rare. Structural bias rarer still. And if something truly mad happens, appeal courts will rush in wearing capes to put everything right.
My case is what happens when that story collapses and crawls under the sofa.
When you start out as a doctor there are many things you expect to lose: sleep, weekends, vitamin D, any realistic hope of owning a property.
What you do not expect to lose is whistleblowing protection for the entire nation’s doctors during a court hearing.
In 2015, the courts accepted an argument so astonishing it should have come with its own laugh track: that Health Education England - the body funding doctors, controlling where they work, how they train, how they’re assessed, and whether their careers live or die - was apparently not responsible for junior doctors, or in legal terms, had no substantial influence over them.
This legal sleight of hand removed 54,000 doctors from whistleblowing protection for 4 years.
Not because Parliament intended it. Not because the law demanded it. But because lawyers said it, and two judges went along with it.
The purpose was to stop my whistleblowing case ever being heard by a court.
The commissioning contracts proving this was nonsense existed the entire time. They were not disclosed. When they finally surfaced five years later, it turned out they had been drafted by the same law firm making vast sums of public money advancing the very argument they contradicted.
A former health minister later described this in Parliament as conduct that “smacks of unethical behaviour”.
The courts felt more comfortable describing it as a “gap in the law” shifting the blame to MPs.
If this were a medical error, we would call it a never event. In law, it was just… Tuesday.
In the UK, there is a comforting bedtime story we tell ourselves about judges.
It goes something like this: judges are neutral, wise, objective people who simply weigh evidence on a set of invisible scales. Sometimes they get it wrong, but only in the way a GP occasionally misdiagnoses hay fever as a cold.
Bias, we’re told, is rare. Structural bias rarer still. And if something truly mad happens, appeal courts will rush in wearing capes to put everything right.
My case is what happens when that story collapses and crawls under the sofa.
When you start out as a doctor there are many things you expect to lose: sleep, weekends, vitamin D, any realistic hope of owning a property.
What you do not expect to lose is whistleblowing protection for the entire nation’s doctors during a court hearing.
In 2015, the courts accepted an argument so astonishing it should have come with its own laugh track: that Health Education England - the body funding doctors, controlling where they work, how they train, how they’re assessed, and whether their careers live or die - was apparently not responsible for junior doctors, or in legal terms, had no substantial influence over them.
This legal sleight of hand removed 54,000 doctors from whistleblowing protection for 4 years.
Not because Parliament intended it. Not because the law demanded it. But because lawyers said it, and two judges went along with it.
The purpose was to stop my whistleblowing case ever being heard by a court.
The commissioning contracts proving this was nonsense existed the entire time. They were not disclosed. When they finally surfaced five years later, it turned out they had been drafted by the same law firm making vast sums of public money advancing the very argument they contradicted.
A former health minister later described this in Parliament as conduct that “smacks of unethical behaviour”.
The courts felt more comfortable describing it as a “gap in the law” shifting the blame to MPs.
If this were a medical error, we would call it a never event. In law, it was just… Tuesday.
3/6 The Day the Trial Got Dangerous
After four years of procedural trench warfare, my whistleblowing case finally reached a full hearing in October 2018.
At that hearing I endured six days of cross-examination. Answers were interrupted whenever they wandered too close to awkward subjects: a patient bleeding to death from a botched procedure; why staffing was unsafe; who knew it was unsafe; why nothing changed. Resistance became even more vigorous whenever I attempted to refer to a document showing any of this.
Fourteen NHS witnesses were still waiting to be cross-examined.
They never were.
Before a single NHS executive took the stand, the case suddenly developed a new symptom: acute costs toxicity.
Ordinary costs. Wasted costs. The polite but unmistakable suggestion that if I carried on, I might lose my house.
The cure was immediate settlement - including an agreed public statement indicating that I believed the NHS had acted “in good faith”.
This was impressive, given that I did not believe that, had never believed that, and had spent four years, thousands of pages, and my late twenties and half my thirties explaining why I did not believe that.
But when the alternative is financial annihilation, justice becomes a luxury item.
To observers in the public gallery - consultant doctors, GPs, journalists - it was obvious what had happened. My evidence stopped. The respondents’ evidence was never tested. A tidy narrative replaced a dangerous one.
In medicine we call this symptom control without treating the disease.
After four years of procedural trench warfare, my whistleblowing case finally reached a full hearing in October 2018.
At that hearing I endured six days of cross-examination. Answers were interrupted whenever they wandered too close to awkward subjects: a patient bleeding to death from a botched procedure; why staffing was unsafe; who knew it was unsafe; why nothing changed. Resistance became even more vigorous whenever I attempted to refer to a document showing any of this.
Fourteen NHS witnesses were still waiting to be cross-examined.
They never were.
Before a single NHS executive took the stand, the case suddenly developed a new symptom: acute costs toxicity.
Ordinary costs. Wasted costs. The polite but unmistakable suggestion that if I carried on, I might lose my house.
The cure was immediate settlement - including an agreed public statement indicating that I believed the NHS had acted “in good faith”.
This was impressive, given that I did not believe that, had never believed that, and had spent four years, thousands of pages, and my late twenties and half my thirties explaining why I did not believe that.
But when the alternative is financial annihilation, justice becomes a luxury item.
To observers in the public gallery - consultant doctors, GPs, journalists - it was obvious what had happened. My evidence stopped. The respondents’ evidence was never tested. A tidy narrative replaced a dangerous one.
In medicine we call this symptom control without treating the disease.
